A Petition to Congress against the MSM

[SteveMartin]

"...the right to petition for the redress of grievances."--First Amendment, U.S. Constitution.

 

[MS0453]

And you think that petitioning Congress to insure a fair and democratic election is somehow outside of the libertarian milieu? A fair and free press is the very essence and underpinning of a free society.

fair?

No thanks

 

[Mark Rushmore]

HOLY CRAP wow guys you'll NEVER BELIEVE WHAT I JUST DISCOVERED! I was all ready to reply with RON PAUL WOULD HATE FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS IF to get them we had to regulate private businesses - when I DISCOVERED that there is this thing called the "F -C-C" which is a FEderal body that perpetuates media monopolization OF the public airwaves!? WTFz0rz?! WOW it would be so inappropriate to write our Senators about something like a Federal Bureau just because we wished in principle that it didn't exist - that'd be loony.

 

[SteveMartin]

Alright, just "free" then...

 

[ErikBlack]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

You are really confused on the concept of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not guarantee you the right to HEAR whatever you want from others. It guarantees you the right to SAY whatever you want.

The media has no obligation to you or to anyone to be "free and fair and unbiased". They can broadcast whatever they choose. They are not a public service or a government agency. They are a private company in the business of providing ENTERTAINMENT. If you don't like what you hear you can choose not to watch.

Congress has no authority to regulate the media and even the Neocons and Democrats wouldn't go as far as to request that! What you are asking is WAY OUT OF LINE! Only the worst authoritarian states have government controlled media. Countries like N. Korea and China. These are no role models for us freedom-loving Americans.

 

[Mark Rushmore]

They are not a public service or a government agency.

They are government licensed, and the usurption of individual rights to local airwaves historically occurred precisely under the excuse that those licensed would be providing a public service ('socially beneficial').

 

[Isupportliberty]

this is a horrible idea.

 

[mconder]

Government can break up monopolies.

 

[SteveMartin]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

You are really confused on the concept of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not guarantee you the right to HEAR whatever you want from others. It guarantees you the right to SAY whatever you want.

The media has no obligation to you or to anyone to be "free and fair and unbiased". They can broadcast whatever they choose. They are not a public service or a government agency. They are a private company in the business of providing ENTERTAINMENT. If you don't like what you hear you can choose not to watch.

Congress has no authority to regulate the media and even the Neocons and Democrats wouldn't go as far as to request that! What you are asking is WAY OUT OF LINE! Only the worst authoritarian states have government controlled media. Countries like N. Korea and China. These are no role models for us freedom-loving Americans.

We are not discussing freedom of speech here, at least I am not. We are discussing the right of petition.

You are way out of line in using extreme Libertarian ideology to support the blatant, un-Constitutional manipulation of the electoral process practiced by the MSM in this country over the past few decades, but especially in this election. We are not talking about the right to be entertained as we see fit, we are talking about the right to elect the public officials that we choose to elect without oligarchic elites twisting the truth and misleading the people.

Congressional hearings into the multiple abuses of the MSM towards the Ron Paul campaign would put the entire MSM on notice that "We, the People" are on to, and sick of, their treasonous manipulation.

You are free to not sign the petition, but you are not correct to say that Congress has no right to "regulate the media." When the media becomes the weapon of tyranny and enslavement the Constitution REQUIRES the Congress to insure a free press.

 

[mconder]

How can a “privately-owned” profit-driven, politically-connected industry be a “free press”?

 

[SteveMartin]

How can a “privately-owned” profit-driven, politically-connected industry be a “free press”?

Good question. Let's appeal for change so that one can be restored in this country.

 

[jmunjr]

While your intentions are good. I believe that this goes against Ron Paul's core philosophy. In essence, you are demanding that the Federal Government attempt to control the media.

+1

 

[ecliptic]

... and don't forget to BOYCOTT

To get more media coverage, we need to do well in Iowa. Instead of spending time complaining against the media, spend time on writing letters or emails to Iowans. Write letters to Iowa newspapers. Or use your time time working to save money to donate to the campaign.

The media are private companies. However unfair their treatment of Ron Paul may be, we should not advocate the use of force-- dragging their representatives to Congressional hearings--to change their behavior.

Agreed. The free-market solution is before you:

BOYCOTT OLD MEDIA

 

[Mark Rushmore]

While your intentions are good. I believe that this goes against Ron Paul's core philosophy. In essence, you are demanding that the Federal Government attempt to control the media.

The Federal Government already controls the media. Start broadcasting an alternative radio station from your home and see what happens. I would like nothing more than for the government to be the hell out of it all - but while they are busy enforcing monopolies 'in your name' - it is a twisted principle indeed that compels you not to inform them that they do not speak for you.

The petition as it stands is poorly worded, but the notion that we'd better not voice our displeasure at the current regulatory scheme to our representatives because we'd rather a world with no regulatory scheme at all - doesn't even compute.

 

[BarryDonegan]

Please take a minute to go and sign this petition, and to spread it on all the message boards and email listing that you are involved with:

A Petition for Fair and Equal Treatment in the Media of Dr Ron Paul's Presidential Election Campaign
Paul as the Republican favorite of over 80% of those participating, and...

ron paul would oppose this.

a boycott is the proper way to do this. and to begin to promote people to new forms of media which are better.

if this came up as a bill in congress, ron paul would vote against it.

 

[rfbz]

yeah just what we need, the govt stepping in to make things "fair". we all know how well that works out

 

[LeonardK]

The Federal Government already controls the media. Start broadcasting an alternative radio station from your home and see what happens.

The FCC needs to regulate the RF spectrum because it's a shared resource. Without some regulation, you'd have to get in your car every morning and tune your analog dial around until you found where your buddies had moved their station to that morning to avoid the jamming from the guys who don't like them.

Oh and I'm PO'd this morning so I'll crank up my 50kw and jam all AM today.

Basically the spectrum would be useless to everyone without moderate regulation.

While a practical, science-based regulation is needed for the shared resource to be useful, today, the FCC has certainly overstepped this function by stepping into content control and ownership controls and a host of other things to "make it more fair". They've failed.

And you want more stepping in from them? No thanks. Seriously, this thread and petition should die, if not for the sole reason that, as another poster has said, if it came up in congress Dr. Paul would vote NO!

 

[BarryDonegan]

OLD MEDIA should be the new term for MSM. do not use the term MSM anymore, replace it with OLD MEDIA.

this will hurry up the transition

ecliptic had the quote for the idea, but i think we should make it policy for ourselves as a group

 

[torchbearer]

signed

 

[Mark Rushmore]

And you want more stepping in from them? No thanks. Seriously, this thread and petition should die, if not for the sole reason that, as another poster has said, if it came up in congress Dr. Paul would vote NO!

How is holding them to account on how the are currently licensing "more" stepping in? If they are already neck-deep, where is this "more" coming from? If you read my posts, you'll see I do not approve of this petition as worded, I am responding to those folks who believe the MSM is the product of free-market forces, and who do not seem to understand that they exist by virtue of a government-enforced monopoly position which prevents local competition with their subsidiaries.